Disney Movie Marathon Challenge

Yes, the Rescuers Down Under is a pretty good movie, if nothing special. It sits in a weird place as The Little Mermaid began the Disney Renaissance with full force, but this one feels like one of the 80's movies, though it would probably be the best of them. It does have more action than the original, though maybe a little less gravitas. I do wish they had payed more of the Rescue Aid Society anthem. If you listen closely you can hear it as the distress call makes it to New York, but why not play that up more? Still, Down Under is a solid flick and lots of fun!

The string of hits keeps coming - I doubt there'll be a bad thing to say about the next four or five films! :) Perfection is on display.
 
Day 36: Beauty and the Beast (1991)

You may have worked out somewhere along the way that Beauty and the Beast is one of my favourite Disney movies of all time - definitely in the top 2 or 3. That being the case it’s quite difficult to review this movie as so many aspects of it are so completely perfect - the animation, the characterisation, the music, the pacing - all are superlative examples of the animated film genre. So instead of rhapsodising about every minute of this movie and going on for hours and hours (and believe me, I could - while we were watching the film we kept having to pause it so we could describe to each other why a particular seemingly throwaway moment was so damn perfect!) I am instead going to highlight a few key things about the movie and describe why they are so right. The significance of these things will hopefully become clear as I go along.

Fact 1: Beauty and the Beast is 84 minutes long - it's the perfect length. Every second of the movie serves the plot or theme in some way. To add in more story, or to labour over points that are made deftly and succinctly would be a disservice to the movie as a whole. Yes there are things that aren't entirely made clear (how old the beast was when he was cursed, whether every piece of furniture in the castle is an enchanted person etc.) but who cares? These are questions that mean nothing to the story that is being told and to try to explain them would slow things down and detract from the storytelling.

Fact 2: Gaston is a big, mean bully with no backstory to explain why - why? Because we don't need to know his backstory. It’s all there in the movie. It’s another example of the movie’s lightness of touch - Gaston is a big, mean bully because he is a good-looking ‘alpha male’ in a village full of people who idolise him. It’s made him believe he is entitled to anything he wants. We can see all this within a few seconds of him appearing on the screen from the way he acts and the way others react to him. We don't need anything more than what we’re given.

Fact 3: The Beast is a nice person. This is kind of fundamental to the story. We are supposed to compare Gaston and the Beast. In a way they could be said to start the story in the same place - but it’s where they end up that’s so important. And the movie indicates to us over and over again that the Beast is fundamentally a good person. Yes, he has a temper problem, but every time he lashes out we see him immediately regret it. And (again, fundamentally) this isn’t because of coaching by Belle. She doesn’t set out to make herself a prince from a beast, or to teach the Beast to be a good person - she treats him (and Gaston) exactly as he deserves to be treated. When the Beast is being a bad-tempered a*se she wants nothing to do with him; when he’s saving her life and giving her libraries she becomes his friend; when he opens his heart to her she falls for him. This is a relationship that develops as a relationship should and will clearly be a marriage of true equals.

It’s kind of important also to note that, even though this is a Disney Princess story and is always talked about as if it is one, the real story isn’t Belle’s, it’s the Beast’s. She is kind of perfect from the get-go and doesn’t really have an arc. It’s pretty clear that Belle doesn't have to try and look past the Beast’s ugliness to see the beauty within - she sees past Gaston’s beauty to see the ugliness within in the first few minutes of the movie. She just wants someone to talk to about her books and to appreciate her for who she is - she doesn’t care if that’s a Baker or a Beast. No, the real arc is the Beast’s. He is the one who has to learn and change in order to get what he wants.

Fact 4: Nobody tells Belle about the rose - this is so so fundamental to the story that it’s amazing they don't draw more attention to it. Nobody tells her that if she doesn't fall for the Beast she’s condemning him and his servants for life. Nobody tells her they’re on the clock. It’s all allowed to be her choice. And yes, I mean her choice. Yes, she’s imprisoned by the Beast, but as soon as he shouts at her over the rose she immediately leaves - and this is later that same night. And nobody tries to stop her, even though her leaving is the end of the only spark of hope they’ve had in years. When she returns after the Beast saves her life his behaviour changes towards her completely. She doesn’t just stay out of gratitude because he saved her, she stays because she likes him, because he treats her well.

Fact 5: This movie’s screenplay was written by a woman. This may seem like a small and insubstantial point, and I may be wrong, but I think there’s a reason Belle is so many girls’ and women’s favourite Disney Princess. I think it’s not an accident that the only Disney Princess movie to be written solely by a woman is also the one that gives its female protagonist the most agency and a personality that immediately resonates with so many women. We’ve all been Belle trying to politely reject Gaston, or geeking out over our favourite book, or feeling like we didn’t fit in somehow, wanting adventure, or just to be seen and loved for who we are. Of course these aren’t exclusively female traits, and I think that's part of what makes Belle such a well-written character. She has a lot of very feminine characteristics, but she’s also just a great character, and would be whatever gender she was.

It may be that you have now spotted the thing that all of these facts about Beauty and the Beast have in common, but here it is just in case you didn’t: these are all things that are true of the original Beauty and the Beast but not of the 2017 live action remake. Let’s look at them again.

Fact 1: The remake of Beauty and the Beast is 129 minutes long. And what do we learn or experience in those extra 45 minutes that deepens our understanding or appreciation of this already perfectly-told story? Nothing. We learn that not everything in the castle is an enchanted person. Er, great.
Fact 2: Gaston is given a backstory which is something to do with the war for some reason. Are we supposed to infer that he’s traumatised and that’s why he’s such an awful person? Or is it that he’s not such a bad guy after all and if Belle just became his life coach he’d shape up like the Beast does? Either way, it’s a terrible decision. He also starts out not that bad - he’s a bit of a dummy but not actively dreadful the way he is the in animated version - then half way through he straight up decides to murder Maurice out of nowhere.

Fact 3: The Beast is no longer a nice person. Not content with him being a buffalo-man with a terrible temper, they decided he should also be a dreadful snob, who sneers at Belle for her taste in books and for being a commoner. Good choice, guys.

Fact 4: Belle knows about the rose. This is terrible for two equally important reasons; 1) because it takes away some of her agency as a character and suggests she might be staying in the castle out of guilt, and 2) when she does leave the castle, she knows that she’s abandoning its inhabitants to their deaths. This is because, in another spectacularly bad decision on the part of the filmmakers, it's now the case that when the last petal falls, Lumiere, Mrs Potts, Cogsworth and all the rest of them turn into inanimate objects forever. This is left deliberately ambiguous in the original movie and for very good reason. When the Beast sets Belle free (the moment in the original movie where his character arc reaches its zenith, when he has proved he can be selfless and truly good), he knows that he is not only condemning himself to be a beast forever, but also that all of his servants will now die. So that Belle can go be with her dad when he has a cough. And she goes. Probably condemning them all to die. Nice.

Fact 5: This movie is written by a man. And there’s lots in that is supposed to be feminist or whatever, but it’s all cosmetic, goes nowhere and adds nothing to the story. There’s lots of us being told how ‘ahead of her time’ Belle is, and the townsfolk are certainly very unkind to her, but none of it impacts on the story in a meaningful way. Does Belle being ‘ahead of her time’ factor into how she interacts with the other characters? Do the townsfolk learn to be more accepting? Nope.

In pointing these things out my aim is to show how fundamentally the makers of the live action movie misunderstood what made the original great, and undermined many of its perfections.

But maybe I’m being unfair. I mean the live action movie does have Evermore, which is a completely brilliant song. And it has the plague. And I know what I thought when I first watched Beauty and the Beast at the age of about 6: ‘You know what this movie needs? More plague.’

Smh.

So I think I’ll stop there, as I’ve already gone on and on a bit. I hope you don’t hate this slightly different approach to reviewing the movie too much. As you can probably tell I have a bit of an axe to grind with the live action Beauty and the Beast, but nothing but love and appreciation for the original. It should have won the best picture oscar.
 
Well, you are right about Beauty and the Beast being perfect and one of the best Disney animated films, if not the best. It has brilliant songs, a beautiful score, and beautiful animation. This is the first movie where we see CAPS in full swing, and man, does it show. Even compared to The Little Mermaid, the animation has made a huge leap. This is the gold standard

One thing to note in your review, and this is not to downplay the contribution that Linda Wolverton made to the project as she was definitely a defining voice for it, however it's just the way screenplay credits are handled in Hollywood that can be misleading. Most movies are written by committee and go through several if not dozens of script rewrites. The credited writers are determined by WGA, so while the 2017 movie is "written by men" that is probably not exclusively the case. I certainly don't think they tried to downplay any of the feminism from the original, but I do think they were trying to add depth and detail, which I 100% agree with you in the end added nothing. To me the live action movie was fine, good even - if the animated version never existed. It is superfluous and practically identical in most regards. For me, I'll watch the animated one every time.
 
Well, you are right about Beauty and the Beast being perfect and one of the best Disney animated films, if not the best. It has brilliant songs, a beautiful score, and beautiful animation. This is the first movie where we see CAPS in full swing, and man, does it show. Even compared to The Little Mermaid, the animation has made a huge leap. This is the gold standard

One thing to note in your review, and this is not to downplay the contribution that Linda Wolverton made to the project as she was definitely a defining voice for it, however it's just the way screenplay credits are handled in Hollywood that can be misleading. Most movies are written by committee and go through several if not dozens of script rewrites. The credited writers are determined by WGA, so while the 2017 movie is "written by men" that is probably not exclusively the case. I certainly don't think they tried to downplay any of the feminism from the original, but I do think they were trying to add depth and detail, which I 100% agree with you in the end added nothing. To me the live action movie was fine, good even - if the animated version never existed. It is superfluous and practically identical in most regards. For me, I'll watch the animated one every time.

It's clear there were many voices involved. Ashmen and Menken, for example, effected the story of The Little Mermaid and how characters were realised and I bet it was the same for this too. (Genuises! :) It is interesting that the original is the only Disney princess movie credited exclusively to a woman though.

I don't think they are downplaying feminism with the live action, I just don't think the live action movie 'gets it' or what made the original so special in what it was saying.

If anything the live-action tries to hamm it up, in a 'paint by numbers way'. Belle is actually scorned for teaching a kid to read. I think its more interesting that the villages just don't get her for even wanting to read :)
 


Day 37: Aladdin (1992)

Aladdin is a really fun, witty and likeable film which, though it may be slightly overshadowed by Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King, is one of the highlights of the Renaissance era. It’s nicely animated with colourful characters, beautiful backgrounds and great songs. I like this movie a LOT!

The plot is good, with a well-established romance between the central couple and then the three wishes device to structure the rest of the movie around. They also do a great job of developing both Aladdin’s and the genie’s character arcs - it’s nice to have two central characters to root for, and not just one.

The songs are also used to great effect as songs should be in a musical. Apart, perhaps, from Prince Ali, they all move the story along in some significant way or tell us something significant that we didn't know. You could even argue Prince Ali does this, and it’s such a fab song that who cares anyway? My favourite song is of course A Whole New World - I mean who wouldn’t fall for a guy after a magic carpet ride and a song like that? Shoutout to Lea Salonga in her first Disney Princess role - damn that woman can sing!

As for the characters they’re for the most part really likeable. Al is a liar and a thief, but the movie still makes you really root for him. Loveable rogue about covers it! It's nice to have a main character in a Disney movie who isn’t a paragon of virtue and needs to learn an important lesson before the end of the movie. Jasmine is a fun and sexy heroine, though the forced marriage plotline could maybe be dealt with a bit more sensitively. In fact Jasmine’s dad is probably the worst character in the film. The fact that he’s a bumbling idiot doesn’t excuse the fact that he’s forcing his daughter into marriage, or the fact that he’s allowing Jafar to manipulate him. He should also do something about the homelessness problem in Agrabah.

Jafar is a really good villain - you just love to hate him. I wish he could have a proper villain song as the actor absolutely kills it in that reprise of Prince Ali. He seems to be one of those evil-for-the-love-of-it Disney villains that you barely ever get nowadays and which are so satisfying. Though you could suggest that the sultan is such a terrible sultan that Jafar is justified in trying to remove him! We also both agreed that Iago was one of our favourite villain sidekicks. (Mad props to whoever decided on that name!) He’s not just there to be useless or snipe from the sidelines, he actually has ideas and makes things happen - though he does a fair amount of sniping from the sidelines too. This having been said the decision to build a whole sequel around an Iago redemption arc is a mystifying one.

Most of all however, this movie belongs to Robin Williams. It’s the first and possibly only Disney movie to be so completely stolen by one character, especially a second-tier character. And although a significant amount of the credit must go to Robin Williams for creating the character, you’ve got to give Disney props too for having confidence in him and letting him do whatever he wanted with the character. Though not of course for the way they treated him afterwards! The genie is a piece of unique, unconventional genius that could never be repeated. Though, Disney being Disney, they tried to replicate the success of the character unsuccessfully, as evidenced by the two limp sequels to Aladdin (though the second one is much better than the first since Robin Williams is actually in it).

Genie doesn’t actually appear until a good way into the film (maybe 40 minutes?) but his personality is so much a part of the film that it feels like he’s there all the way through. He also gets two fantastic songs which Robin Williams delivers perfectly. Friend Like Me must be one of the best ‘sidekick songs’ and that whole section is animated so exuberantly that it’s one of the highlights of the film. It feels like a big celebratory broadway number, which is possible why it was the only good bit of the stage show (so surprising we were soooo excited to see it), which we saw in London a couple of years ago.

This is a slightly shorter review than they have been of late, but this is basically you probably need a break! You shouldn’t read into it that I like this movie a lot less than The Little Mermaid or Beauty and the Beast. It’s maybe not quite as special to me, but it was still a big part of my childhood and is a movie I’ve adored for most of my life.
 
Day 37: Aladdin (1992)

Aladdin is a really fun, witty and likeable film which, though it may be slightly overshadowed by Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King, is one of the highlights of the Renaissance era. It’s nicely animated with colourful characters, beautiful backgrounds and great songs. I like this movie a LOT!

The plot is good, with a well-established romance between the central couple and then the three wishes device to structure the rest of the movie around. They also do a great job of developing both Aladdin’s and the genie’s character arcs - it’s nice to have two central characters to root for, and not just one.

The songs are also used to great effect as songs should be in a musical. Apart, perhaps, from Prince Ali, they all move the story along in some significant way or tell us something significant that we didn't know. You could even argue Prince Ali does this, and it’s such a fab song that who cares anyway? My favourite song is of course A Whole New World - I mean who wouldn’t fall for a guy after a magic carpet ride and a song like that? Shoutout to Lea Salonga in her first Disney Princess role - damn that woman can sing!

As for the characters they’re for the most part really likeable. Al is a liar and a thief, but the movie still makes you really root for him. Loveable rogue about covers it! It's nice to have a main character in a Disney movie who isn’t a paragon of virtue and needs to learn an important lesson before the end of the movie. Jasmine is a fun and sexy heroine, though the forced marriage plotline could maybe be dealt with a bit more sensitively. In fact Jasmine’s dad is probably the worst character in the film. The fact that he’s a bumbling idiot doesn’t excuse the fact that he’s forcing his daughter into marriage, or the fact that he’s allowing Jafar to manipulate him. He should also do something about the homelessness problem in Agrabah.

Jafar is a really good villain - you just love to hate him. I wish he could have a proper villain song as the actor absolutely kills it in that reprise of Prince Ali. He seems to be one of those evil-for-the-love-of-it Disney villains that you barely ever get nowadays and which are so satisfying. Though you could suggest that the sultan is such a terrible sultan that Jafar is justified in trying to remove him! We also both agreed that Iago was one of our favourite villain sidekicks. (Mad props to whoever decided on that name!) He’s not just there to be useless or snipe from the sidelines, he actually has ideas and makes things happen - though he does a fair amount of sniping from the sidelines too. This having been said the decision to build a whole sequel around an Iago redemption arc is a mystifying one.

Most of all however, this movie belongs to Robin Williams. It’s the first and possibly only Disney movie to be so completely stolen by one character, especially a second-tier character. And although a significant amount of the credit must go to Robin Williams for creating the character, you’ve got to give Disney props too for having confidence in him and letting him do whatever he wanted with the character. Though not of course for the way they treated him afterwards! The genie is a piece of unique, unconventional genius that could never be repeated. Though, Disney being Disney, they tried to replicate the success of the character unsuccessfully, as evidenced by the two limp sequels to Aladdin (though the second one is much better than the first since Robin Williams is actually in it).

Genie doesn’t actually appear until a good way into the film (maybe 40 minutes?) but his personality is so much a part of the film that it feels like he’s there all the way through. He also gets two fantastic songs which Robin Williams delivers perfectly. Friend Like Me must be one of the best ‘sidekick songs’ and that whole section is animated so exuberantly that it’s one of the highlights of the film. It feels like a big celebratory broadway number, which is possible why it was the only good bit of the stage show (so surprising we were soooo excited to see it), which we saw in London a couple of years ago.

This is a slightly shorter review than they have been of late, but this is basically you probably need a break! You shouldn’t read into it that I like this movie a lot less than The Little Mermaid or Beauty and the Beast. It’s maybe not quite as special to me, but it was still a big part of my childhood and is a movie I’ve adored for most of my life.

Oh, yes, another spot-on hit, Aladdin, and yeah, it is pretty much thanks to Genie and Robin Williams. It's a great movie with great songs and great visuals. CAPS muscle is on display in the Cave of Wonders - NOBODY else was doing stuff like this in animation! It would come into vogue later, but this was what was making Disney once again a cut above the rest.
 
BATB Homerun, Aladdin Homerun. Great music and as Brian mentioned, the animation has taken a huge jump, which is why TLM looks a bit weak comparatively. Anecdote: I attended a community premier of BATB with Richard White, the voice of Gaston. He made a few remarks just before the movie started and I think he mentioned how much improvement there was in the animation. He mentioned the chandelier in the ballroom scene and how it looked almost 3D. When that scene came on the screen there was a noticeable gasp from the audience.:earsboy:
 


BATB Homerun, Aladdin Homerun. Great music and as Brian mentioned, the animation has taken a huge jump, which is why TLM looks a bit weak comparatively. Anecdote: I attended a community premier of BATB with Richard White, the voice of Gaston. He made a few remarks just before the movie started and I think he mentioned how much improvement there was in the animation. He mentioned the chandelier in the ballroom scene and how it looked almost 3D. When that scene came on the screen there was a noticeable gasp from the audience.:earsboy:

That is a gasp that was recreated from the Snow White and The 7 Dwarfs premiere. Nobody had ever really seen "realistic" animation and when the picture opens and starts zooming in on the castle, the audience gasped. That multi-plane camera was doing the work then, and it was leaps beyond what anyone else was doing. CAPS did it in the 90's. Today, the Hyperion Engine powers Disney Feature Animation projects, and it earns it's keep as Disney has once again become the leader in animated visuals. The render work for Moana's hair and water effects is jaw-dropping!
 
That multi-plane camera was doing the work then, and it was leaps beyond what anyone else was doing.
The multiplane camera was awesome. One of my favorite multiplane sequences in the opening of Pinocchio. It's similar to the Snow White opening but the camera moves around the village and the perception of depth is fantastic. The multiplane camera was a beast too, the thing was huge.
 
We saw the use of the multiplane way back in The Reluctant Dragon, so interesting!

Unfortunately, no reviews this week as we just have not had an opportunity to watch anything...Work will get in the way of Disney sometimes! :)

Hoping for more chances to watch stuff next week!
 
We saw the use of the multiplane way back in The Reluctant Dragon, so interesting!

Unfortunately, no reviews this week as we just have not had an opportunity to watch anything...Work will get in the way of Disney sometimes! :)

Hoping for more chances to watch stuff next week!

I understand. We miss the reviews though. It's always fun. You're right in the middle of the good stuff too!
 
Day 36: Beauty and the Beast (1991)

You may have worked out somewhere along the way that Beauty and the Beast is one of my favourite Disney movies of all time - definitely in the top 2 or 3. That being the case it’s quite difficult to review this movie as so many aspects of it are so completely perfect - the animation, the characterisation, the music, the pacing - all are superlative examples of the animated film genre. So instead of rhapsodising about every minute of this movie and going on for hours and hours (and believe me, I could - while we were watching the film we kept having to pause it so we could describe to each other why a particular seemingly throwaway moment was so damn perfect!) I am instead going to highlight a few key things about the movie and describe why they are so right. The significance of these things will hopefully become clear as I go along.

Fact 1: Beauty and the Beast is 84 minutes long - it's the perfect length. Every second of the movie serves the plot or theme in some way. To add in more story, or to labour over points that are made deftly and succinctly would be a disservice to the movie as a whole. Yes there are things that aren't entirely made clear (how old the beast was when he was cursed, whether every piece of furniture in the castle is an enchanted person etc.) but who cares? These are questions that mean nothing to the story that is being told and to try to explain them would slow things down and detract from the storytelling.

Fact 2: Gaston is a big, mean bully with no backstory to explain why - why? Because we don't need to know his backstory. It’s all there in the movie. It’s another example of the movie’s lightness of touch - Gaston is a big, mean bully because he is a good-looking ‘alpha male’ in a village full of people who idolise him. It’s made him believe he is entitled to anything he wants. We can see all this within a few seconds of him appearing on the screen from the way he acts and the way others react to him. We don't need anything more than what we’re given.

Fact 3: The Beast is a nice person. This is kind of fundamental to the story. We are supposed to compare Gaston and the Beast. In a way they could be said to start the story in the same place - but it’s where they end up that’s so important. And the movie indicates to us over and over again that the Beast is fundamentally a good person. Yes, he has a temper problem, but every time he lashes out we see him immediately regret it. And (again, fundamentally) this isn’t because of coaching by Belle. She doesn’t set out to make herself a prince from a beast, or to teach the Beast to be a good person - she treats him (and Gaston) exactly as he deserves to be treated. When the Beast is being a bad-tempered a*se she wants nothing to do with him; when he’s saving her life and giving her libraries she becomes his friend; when he opens his heart to her she falls for him. This is a relationship that develops as a relationship should and will clearly be a marriage of true equals.

It’s kind of important also to note that, even though this is a Disney Princess story and is always talked about as if it is one, the real story isn’t Belle’s, it’s the Beast’s. She is kind of perfect from the get-go and doesn’t really have an arc. It’s pretty clear that Belle doesn't have to try and look past the Beast’s ugliness to see the beauty within - she sees past Gaston’s beauty to see the ugliness within in the first few minutes of the movie. She just wants someone to talk to about her books and to appreciate her for who she is - she doesn’t care if that’s a Baker or a Beast. No, the real arc is the Beast’s. He is the one who has to learn and change in order to get what he wants.

Fact 4: Nobody tells Belle about the rose - this is so so fundamental to the story that it’s amazing they don't draw more attention to it. Nobody tells her that if she doesn't fall for the Beast she’s condemning him and his servants for life. Nobody tells her they’re on the clock. It’s all allowed to be her choice. And yes, I mean her choice. Yes, she’s imprisoned by the Beast, but as soon as he shouts at her over the rose she immediately leaves - and this is later that same night. And nobody tries to stop her, even though her leaving is the end of the only spark of hope they’ve had in years. When she returns after the Beast saves her life his behaviour changes towards her completely. She doesn’t just stay out of gratitude because he saved her, she stays because she likes him, because he treats her well.

Fact 5: This movie’s screenplay was written by a woman. This may seem like a small and insubstantial point, and I may be wrong, but I think there’s a reason Belle is so many girls’ and women’s favourite Disney Princess. I think it’s not an accident that the only Disney Princess movie to be written solely by a woman is also the one that gives its female protagonist the most agency and a personality that immediately resonates with so many women. We’ve all been Belle trying to politely reject Gaston, or geeking out over our favourite book, or feeling like we didn’t fit in somehow, wanting adventure, or just to be seen and loved for who we are. Of course these aren’t exclusively female traits, and I think that's part of what makes Belle such a well-written character. She has a lot of very feminine characteristics, but she’s also just a great character, and would be whatever gender she was.

It may be that you have now spotted the thing that all of these facts about Beauty and the Beast have in common, but here it is just in case you didn’t: these are all things that are true of the original Beauty and the Beast but not of the 2017 live action remake. Let’s look at them again.

Fact 1: The remake of Beauty and the Beast is 129 minutes long. And what do we learn or experience in those extra 45 minutes that deepens our understanding or appreciation of this already perfectly-told story? Nothing. We learn that not everything in the castle is an enchanted person. Er, great.
Fact 2: Gaston is given a backstory which is something to do with the war for some reason. Are we supposed to infer that he’s traumatised and that’s why he’s such an awful person? Or is it that he’s not such a bad guy after all and if Belle just became his life coach he’d shape up like the Beast does? Either way, it’s a terrible decision. He also starts out not that bad - he’s a bit of a dummy but not actively dreadful the way he is the in animated version - then half way through he straight up decides to murder Maurice out of nowhere.

Fact 3: The Beast is no longer a nice person. Not content with him being a buffalo-man with a terrible temper, they decided he should also be a dreadful snob, who sneers at Belle for her taste in books and for being a commoner. Good choice, guys.

Fact 4: Belle knows about the rose. This is terrible for two equally important reasons; 1) because it takes away some of her agency as a character and suggests she might be staying in the castle out of guilt, and 2) when she does leave the castle, she knows that she’s abandoning its inhabitants to their deaths. This is because, in another spectacularly bad decision on the part of the filmmakers, it's now the case that when the last petal falls, Lumiere, Mrs Potts, Cogsworth and all the rest of them turn into inanimate objects forever. This is left deliberately ambiguous in the original movie and for very good reason. When the Beast sets Belle free (the moment in the original movie where his character arc reaches its zenith, when he has proved he can be selfless and truly good), he knows that he is not only condemning himself to be a beast forever, but also that all of his servants will now die. So that Belle can go be with her dad when he has a cough. And she goes. Probably condemning them all to die. Nice.

Fact 5: This movie is written by a man. And there’s lots in that is supposed to be feminist or whatever, but it’s all cosmetic, goes nowhere and adds nothing to the story. There’s lots of us being told how ‘ahead of her time’ Belle is, and the townsfolk are certainly very unkind to her, but none of it impacts on the story in a meaningful way. Does Belle being ‘ahead of her time’ factor into how she interacts with the other characters? Do the townsfolk learn to be more accepting? Nope.

In pointing these things out my aim is to show how fundamentally the makers of the live action movie misunderstood what made the original great, and undermined many of its perfections.

But maybe I’m being unfair. I mean the live action movie does have Evermore, which is a completely brilliant song. And it has the plague. And I know what I thought when I first watched Beauty and the Beast at the age of about 6: ‘You know what this movie needs? More plague.’

Smh.

So I think I’ll stop there, as I’ve already gone on and on a bit. I hope you don’t hate this slightly different approach to reviewing the movie too much. As you can probably tell I have a bit of an axe to grind with the live action Beauty and the Beast, but nothing but love and appreciation for the original. It should have won the best picture oscar.
I'm a little behind. But as we have Disney songs pumping through the car, it hit me. I would love to hear a psychologist's take on this. As the Beast first gets transformed, and over time, he is angry and disgusted at himself and his appearance. Deep down, he obviously knows he is human, and would refer to his anatomy in human terms. Then, May Be Something There starts playing. You hear the line, "she didn't shudder at MY PAW". So, at some point, angry, disgusted Beast comes to grips with his condition enough to the point where he refers to his own appendage as his paw, not his hand or arm. Sure, it rhymes in song, but that seems to indicate a very significant psychological turn, especially when at this point, with Belle there, he clearly anticipates at least the possibility of becoming human again. Just a thought.
 
The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993)

This one is a bit of an outlier in this string of peerless Disney classics. It’s not bad by any means and is really very creative and unique, it just doesn’t fit in somehow. I must also admit that it’s not one of my favourites. This was actually the first time I watched it all the way through. I can totally see why it appealed to a whole generation of children and young people who maybe thought they were ‘edgy’? but its just not really for me. I do like some Tim Burton films. Edward Scissorhands is awesome, but I really dislike the new Alice films, so its swings and roundabouts with his movies for me.

But as I said you cannot argue it’s a bad movie, and there are positives and negatives, so let’s start with what we liked.

The look of this movie is spectacular. In terms of transporting you into an entirely new world, this may be one of the most successful Disney films ever. There are haunting images in the film that really stick with you. They embrace the grotesque and spooky aesthetic so fully that I think I might have found the film frightening if I’d watched in as a little kid. This is quite a ballsy move on the part of Disney (although not under their own name at the time I believe), for which they get props from me. I also respect the fact that the movie plops you down in the middle of Halloween Town and just lets you get on with it, not trying to over-explain anything. It respects the intelligence of its audience, believing that if the fantasy world is created effectively enough it won’t require lots of exposition. I think kids respond to this unpatronising approach well, so I’m all for it. All in all a lot of care and attention, not to mention creativity, has gone into the creation of every aspect of this movie and it really works. It must have taken them ages!

The music is also brilliant. It’s far more successful as a complete musical piece than some other movies because the songs all sound like they come from the same movie. They are very consistent and create an overall sound for the movie that contributes to the atmosphere created by the visuals. The songs are beautiful and weird and unsettling and just work extremely well.

In terms of what we didn’t like it’s a bit harder to put my finger on. It may come down to this just not really being my sort of thing. I can appreciate it, but maybe I just can’t like it very much. The characters, without exception, seem to be fairly horrible. And I guess they’re meant to be, but it makes them quite difficult to identify with. Some of them are also a little underdeveloped. However, this again could be explained away by saying that they’re archetypes, or that they’re meant to be larger than life - it may just come down to it not being my thing again!

My other issue is that I don’t really know what this movie is trying to tell me. I’d like to believe that Jack learns something from his escapade, but if he does it’s hard to put your finger on what it is. And that being the case it’s also hard to put your finger on what the message of the movie is. Is it stay in your lane and don’t try new things? Or the true spirit of Christmas is love? Or Halloween is better than Christmas anyway? Or simply, don’t mess with Christmas? The fact that I don’t know makes me question whether this movie might be style over substance.

And finally, where do I fall on the big ‘Is It A Halloween Movie Or A Christmas Movie’ debate? My answer is...I don’t care. Feels more like a Halloween movie to me but I genuinely don’t care. The debate seems slightly manufactured anyway, as it means Disney can legitimately sell Nightmare Before Christmas merch at Halloween and Christmas, while hapless shoppers shop :)

So, in summary, although I can totally see why The Nightmare Before Christmas is viewed as a masterpiece by so many people it unfortunately just isn’t for me. And It certainly won’t be making it onto my must-watch Christmas movies list. It does not even compare to the likes of the Muppet Christmas Carol for me:)
 
I'm a little behind. But as we have Disney songs pumping through the car, it hit me. I would love to hear a psychologist's take on this. As the Beast first gets transformed, and over time, he is angry and disgusted at himself and his appearance. Deep down, he obviously knows he is human, and would refer to his anatomy in human terms. Then, May Be Something There starts playing. You hear the line, "she didn't shudder at MY PAW". So, at some point, angry, disgusted Beast comes to grips with his condition enough to the point where he refers to his own appendage as his paw, not his hand or arm. Sure, it rhymes in song, but that seems to indicate a very significant psychological turn, especially when at this point, with Belle there, he clearly anticipates at least the possibility of becoming human again. Just a thought.

I hadn't thought of himself thinking he's a beast and experiencing real contact as being the turning point in becoming human-interesting! Definitely in need a psychologist's input!
 
The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993)

This one is a bit of an outlier in this string of peerless Disney classics. It’s not bad by any means and is really very creative and unique, it just doesn’t fit in somehow. I must also admit that it’s not one of my favourites. This was actually the first time I watched it all the way through. I can totally see why it appealed to a whole generation of children and young people who maybe thought they were ‘edgy’? but its just not really for me. I do like some Tim Burton films. Edward Scissorhands is awesome, but I really dislike the new Alice films, so its swings and roundabouts with his movies for me.

But as I said you cannot argue it’s a bad movie, and there are positives and negatives, so let’s start with what we liked.

The look of this movie is spectacular. In terms of transporting you into an entirely new world, this may be one of the most successful Disney films ever. There are haunting images in the film that really stick with you. They embrace the grotesque and spooky aesthetic so fully that I think I might have found the film frightening if I’d watched in as a little kid. This is quite a ballsy move on the part of Disney (although not under their own name at the time I believe), for which they get props from me. I also respect the fact that the movie plops you down in the middle of Halloween Town and just lets you get on with it, not trying to over-explain anything. It respects the intelligence of its audience, believing that if the fantasy world is created effectively enough it won’t require lots of exposition. I think kids respond to this unpatronising approach well, so I’m all for it. All in all a lot of care and attention, not to mention creativity, has gone into the creation of every aspect of this movie and it really works. It must have taken them ages!

The music is also brilliant. It’s far more successful as a complete musical piece than some other movies because the songs all sound like they come from the same movie. They are very consistent and create an overall sound for the movie that contributes to the atmosphere created by the visuals. The songs are beautiful and weird and unsettling and just work extremely well.

In terms of what we didn’t like it’s a bit harder to put my finger on. It may come down to this just not really being my sort of thing. I can appreciate it, but maybe I just can’t like it very much. The characters, without exception, seem to be fairly horrible. And I guess they’re meant to be, but it makes them quite difficult to identify with. Some of them are also a little underdeveloped. However, this again could be explained away by saying that they’re archetypes, or that they’re meant to be larger than life - it may just come down to it not being my thing again!

My other issue is that I don’t really know what this movie is trying to tell me. I’d like to believe that Jack learns something from his escapade, but if he does it’s hard to put your finger on what it is. And that being the case it’s also hard to put your finger on what the message of the movie is. Is it stay in your lane and don’t try new things? Or the true spirit of Christmas is love? Or Halloween is better than Christmas anyway? Or simply, don’t mess with Christmas? The fact that I don’t know makes me question whether this movie might be style over substance.

And finally, where do I fall on the big ‘Is It A Halloween Movie Or A Christmas Movie’ debate? My answer is...I don’t care. Feels more like a Halloween movie to me but I genuinely don’t care. The debate seems slightly manufactured anyway, as it means Disney can legitimately sell Nightmare Before Christmas merch at Halloween and Christmas, while hapless shoppers shop :)

So, in summary, although I can totally see why The Nightmare Before Christmas is viewed as a masterpiece by so many people it unfortunately just isn’t for me. And It certainly won’t be making it onto my must-watch Christmas movies list. It does not even compare to the likes of the Muppet Christmas Carol for me:)

I love when you throw in a curve-ball!

Anyway, I kinda feel the same way about this movie to an extent. As a film it has a lot of flaws and is "just okay." However, I LOVE the music! The songs are spectacular and, you're right, they tell the story all on their own and form a cohesive musical suite. I love Danny Elfman, form Oingo Boingo to his composing work, and this is one of his masterpieces. Yeah, the film is a bit muddled and clunky (looks gorgeous though!) and yeah, what is the journey? Did Jack learn anything? The characters are all kind of vile, at least those from Halloween Town. Then again, they are some ghoulish things, so, yeah. At any rate, you can see that it is a great film on it's merits, and the lovely stop motion by Henry Selick, but yeah, it's not a favorite of mine aside from the music.

Will you toss in another Henry Selick & Disney work, James and the Giant Peach?
 
I love when you throw in a curve-ball!

Anyway, I kinda feel the same way about this movie to an extent. As a film it has a lot of flaws and is "just okay." However, I LOVE the music! The songs are spectacular and, you're right, they tell the story all on their own and form a cohesive musical suite. I love Danny Elfman, form Oingo Boingo to his composing work, and this is one of his masterpieces. Yeah, the film is a bit muddled and clunky (looks gorgeous though!) and yeah, what is the journey? Did Jack learn anything? The characters are all kind of vile, at least those from Halloween Town. Then again, they are some ghoulish things, so, yeah. At any rate, you can see that it is a great film on it's merits, and the lovely stop motion by Henry Selick, but yeah, it's not a favorite of mine aside from the music.

Will you toss in another Henry Selick & Disney work, James and the Giant Peach?

Who knows! The wiki list reigns supreme here, we never know what its going to throw at us next! Although it also has Studio Ghibli and I really don't see how that counts!
 
The Lion King (1994)

So, cards on the table, this is one of my two 'favourite' Disney movies OF ALL TIME and it is the unarguably the best! (I love the other not because its the best, but because I LOVE it) To me, it is absolutely perfect - the characters, the music, the idea behind it all, the villain and my God the animation! There simply aren't enough superlatives in the world to describe how awesome I think this movie is. I know it’s a fairly common opinion, but it seems to me that that’s for a very good reason. This is everything an animated movie should be, managing to be supremely entertaining and heart-warming but also transcend the medium to become a work of art in and of itself.

In fact, I love this movie so much that reviewing it is quite difficult. Please take it as read that I adore everything in the movie, but I will now take one or two key elements that I think make The Lion King stand out as Disney’s most glorious achievement. If I try to talk about everything we’ll be here for hours, and I will run out of synonyms for the phrase ‘bloody brilliant’.

The villain Wow Scar is a brilliant villain. He is one of those villains who is so attractive as a character that you become certain if he was a tad less murdery you’d definitely be on his side. The design of the character is amazing. We’ve seen the mastery of the Disney animators when portraying human emotions of animals’ faces grow over the years since Dumbo and it reaches its pinnacle here (Fight me Zootopia! I’m just kidding I ADORE Zootopia!). Scar just makes evil look so cool! There’s something a bit rock-starish about how dishevelled and skinny he is and he's so visually different from Mufassa. The voice work by Jeremy Irons is also amazing. I know it’s a bit of a cliche in Hollywood to always have the villain played by a Brit (I guess we just sound like we’re planning world domination...which we are mwahahaha!) but it was a perfect choice here. He has so many super-quotable lines too - ‘I’m surrounded by idiots’ is my personal fave. One of my sister's fav people watching moments in Disney World was seeing a mum with a t-shirt stating this striding along and surrounded by five oblivious kids!

The sidekicks Like Aladdin, The Lion King’s side characters elevate it rather than just being there to make up the numbers. I’m looking at you Fox and the Hound! Timon and Pumbaa are just fantastic and really make an impression considering they're only in half the film. Timon, in particular, I’ve loved since I was little; I think Nathan Lane does fantastic work bringing the character to life. He also sings the songs brilliantly. Sitting here thinking about it I realise they actually give him quite a lot of singing to do, but I almost feel like he deserved more because he does such a great job. Honourable mention also to the hyenas - the design of them is soooo ugly and fantastic, and of course they’re voiced superbly.

The way they handle bereavement Now you can't watch more than a handful of Disney films before you start to notice there’s quite a few dead parents, but this is easily the best treatment of bereavement, and the only one I can think of where a character actually dies on screen. Especially such an important character. It makes Scar all the more effective as a villain that you see him straight up murder his brother. The way ‘the great circle of life’ is handled in this movie is nothing short of beautiful. I can remember being quite shocked and almost not quite believing my eyes when I witnessed Mufasa’s death for the first time as a child. They couldn’t be have actually killed him off could they? Not Mufasa! He’s such a well realised character (warm, wise, funny) and you fall in love with him so completely that his death, though you can feel that it’s necessary for the story, seems extremely cruel. That scene where Simba discovers his father dead and just calls out for help hopelessly never fails to bring a lump to my throat.

The depiction of Africa Part of the reason that I love The Lion King so much is that it recreates East Africa, the part of the world where I did quite a lot of my growing up. I think they also took inspiration from South Africa, but the big open plains of The Pride Lands look very East Africa to me. And what can I say? They had plenty to work with - this to me is the most beautiful place in the whole world - but man, did they do it justice! You can’t help getting caught up in the brilliant story, but whenever you pause the movie you realise that every damn frame is a perfect work of art. The Circle of Life opening sequence (Nyaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa - sorry, I couldn't help myself) is the best in all of Disney, largely because of the stunning visuals. And they aren't content with just making a beautiful place with beautiful animals look beautiful, they choose brilliant camera angles that synch up with the music and lyrics and add to the sense of scale and wonder. You blink along with the baby giraffe as it steps into the sun, and you flinch when the elephant’s giant foot comes down towards you. This is next-level animation.

I could go on and on about every aspect of The Lion King - I haven’t even touched on the music, which is absolutely glorious - but I have run out of time and need to stop there. I’ll just finish by saying that this movie has been special to me since I was very young. I watch it at least once a year and though Disney and Pixar have knocked it out the park on many occasions since, it’s never been knocked off top spot for me. I feel very lucky to have grown up where I did and to have grown up during the Disney Renaissance years!
 
The Lion King (1994)

So, cards on the table, this is one of my two 'favourite' Disney movies OF ALL TIME and it is the unarguably the best! (I love the other not because its the best, but because I LOVE it) To me, it is absolutely perfect - the characters, the music, the idea behind it all, the villain and my God the animation! There simply aren't enough superlatives in the world to describe how awesome I think this movie is. I know it’s a fairly common opinion, but it seems to me that that’s for a very good reason. This is everything an animated movie should be, managing to be supremely entertaining and heart-warming but also transcend the medium to become a work of art in and of itself.

In fact, I love this movie so much that reviewing it is quite difficult. Please take it as read that I adore everything in the movie, but I will now take one or two key elements that I think make The Lion King stand out as Disney’s most glorious achievement. If I try to talk about everything we’ll be here for hours, and I will run out of synonyms for the phrase ‘bloody brilliant’.

The villain Wow Scar is a brilliant villain. He is one of those villains who is so attractive as a character that you become certain if he was a tad less murdery you’d definitely be on his side. The design of the character is amazing. We’ve seen the mastery of the Disney animators when portraying human emotions of animals’ faces grow over the years since Dumbo and it reaches its pinnacle here (Fight me Zootopia! I’m just kidding I ADORE Zootopia!). Scar just makes evil look so cool! There’s something a bit rock-starish about how dishevelled and skinny he is and he's so visually different from Mufassa. The voice work by Jeremy Irons is also amazing. I know it’s a bit of a cliche in Hollywood to always have the villain played by a Brit (I guess we just sound like we’re planning world domination...which we are mwahahaha!) but it was a perfect choice here. He has so many super-quotable lines too - ‘I’m surrounded by idiots’ is my personal fave. One of my sister's fav people watching moments in Disney World was seeing a mum with a t-shirt stating this striding along and surrounded by five oblivious kids!

The sidekicks Like Aladdin, The Lion King’s side characters elevate it rather than just being there to make up the numbers. I’m looking at you Fox and the Hound! Timon and Pumbaa are just fantastic and really make an impression considering they're only in half the film. Timon, in particular, I’ve loved since I was little; I think Nathan Lane does fantastic work bringing the character to life. He also sings the songs brilliantly. Sitting here thinking about it I realise they actually give him quite a lot of singing to do, but I almost feel like he deserved more because he does such a great job. Honourable mention also to the hyenas - the design of them is soooo ugly and fantastic, and of course they’re voiced superbly.

The way they handle bereavement Now you can't watch more than a handful of Disney films before you start to notice there’s quite a few dead parents, but this is easily the best treatment of bereavement, and the only one I can think of where a character actually dies on screen. Especially such an important character. It makes Scar all the more effective as a villain that you see him straight up murder his brother. The way ‘the great circle of life’ is handled in this movie is nothing short of beautiful. I can remember being quite shocked and almost not quite believing my eyes when I witnessed Mufasa’s death for the first time as a child. They couldn’t be have actually killed him off could they? Not Mufasa! He’s such a well realised character (warm, wise, funny) and you fall in love with him so completely that his death, though you can feel that it’s necessary for the story, seems extremely cruel. That scene where Simba discovers his father dead and just calls out for help hopelessly never fails to bring a lump to my throat.

The depiction of Africa Part of the reason that I love The Lion King so much is that it recreates East Africa, the part of the world where I did quite a lot of my growing up. I think they also took inspiration from South Africa, but the big open plains of The Pride Lands look very East Africa to me. And what can I say? They had plenty to work with - this to me is the most beautiful place in the whole world - but man, did they do it justice! You can’t help getting caught up in the brilliant story, but whenever you pause the movie you realise that every damn frame is a perfect work of art. The Circle of Life opening sequence (Nyaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa - sorry, I couldn't help myself) is the best in all of Disney, largely because of the stunning visuals. And they aren't content with just making a beautiful place with beautiful animals look beautiful, they choose brilliant camera angles that synch up with the music and lyrics and add to the sense of scale and wonder. You blink along with the baby giraffe as it steps into the sun, and you flinch when the elephant’s giant foot comes down towards you. This is next-level animation.

I could go on and on about every aspect of The Lion King - I haven’t even touched on the music, which is absolutely glorious - but I have run out of time and need to stop there. I’ll just finish by saying that this movie has been special to me since I was very young. I watch it at least once a year and though Disney and Pixar have knocked it out the park on many occasions since, it’s never been knocked off top spot for me. I feel very lucky to have grown up where I did and to have grown up during the Disney Renaissance years!

Well, there's no question that Lion King is a masterpiece! It is "bloody brilliant" in almost every regard. It's not necessarily my favorite personally, but certainly it is one of the best. I love the opening scene with the Circle of Life music and the presentation of Simba. It sets such an amazing tone. And, yes, the music! It's all so good, including the versions in the film and the Elton John versions as well. I think you said what needs to be said about it.
 
A Goofy Movie (1995)

This was a new one for both of us, and we thoroughly enjoyed it!

The relationship between father and son is fantastic, both Max and Goofy have really lovely arcs, and this really works as a road trip movie. Goofy’s caring and trusting approach to fatherhood is really great-even if he is a little too quick to believe his son has the propensity to end up in ‘the electric chair’ in later life (Disney what were you thinking?) after he hijacks a school assembly to do some sweet moves.

All of the self-aware references are really fun! Ariel, Zero from Nightmare Before Christmas and the Country Bears, are all in here (my favourite reference). I did comment while watching this that Max’s disgruntled expression at having to sit through the Country Bears substitute was very similar to both my sisters’ when forced into the Carousel of Progress and the Tikki Room at Disney World - they flat out refuse to do the Country Bears. We also really liked the trappings of the environment in which the characters live, complete with exploding cassette tapes, waterbeds with actual fish inside, and hot tubs. Is this the 90s nostalgic for the 80s?

The songs are also great. I can see why they have nostalgic value for so many people.

Ok, some queries, about things which we were still not sure about when the movie was finished. 1) Is Goofy their surname? Nickname? Goofy gets called Mr Goof at one point and Max gets called the Goof boy. Is it Max Goof and Goofy Goof? The Goofys? 2) What kind of animals are they? I mean I appreciate Max and Goofy are dogs, but what about the female characters? Are they hybrid human/dogs? Maybe this is best left unknown...

The only thing about the film, and it’s not really a negative, is that when you watch them chronologically as we are, it seems really out of place where it is. It looks like such a throwback to the 80s, which I suppose it was, but it seems to have been an odd time for Disney to make a movie like this bang in the middle of the Renaissance. It really has echoes of Roger Rabbit with all its references and self-awareness, while the artwork is more Oliver and Company and Basil: The Great Mouse Detective.

For all it’s out of place, I am so glad it exists and will definitely watch it again sometime!
 
I'm a little behind so I'll be brief...

NBC- I didn't like this movie at all until I saw the NBC overlay of HM at DLR (did I squeeze in enough acronyms there?) The movie is not a favorite but it's very well done and the music is excellent.
TLK- It's absolutely brilliant though I'm a bit "Lion Kinged Out." The movie, the theatrical presentation, the FOTLK at AK and then the more recent Lion King animated spinoff (big with the grandkids.) ENOUGH! Elton really knocked it out of the park on the music for this one.
AGM-I don't think I've seen this one. The old school Goofy shorts are among Disney's best, I just don't think I can see this in the same light.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!





Top